2009 will be the year of Linux

The resilience of Linux advocates never ceases to surprise me. I think that nothing short of the sun going super nova will make them stop believing that Linux will ever become mainstream.

This article hits a new high, though, because the rationale behind this prediction is a new system that allows Linux systems to boot in just a few seconds. And just based on this wonderful technology, Jim predicts that Linux will ship more desktops than Windows in 2009.

I really wonder if I live on the same planet.

Regardless of the mathematical impossibility of such a prediction just based on market share alone (not helped by the fact that WalMart recently announced it would stop selling Linux computers), the claim that boot times are so important is just plain absurd. Most computers simply go to sleep or hibernate when users turn them off, and from my experience, Windows, Vista and Mac OS turn back on in less than ten seconds in these conditions. Ironically, Linux laptops are still struggling with the concept of hibernation, so it’s quite possible that Linux users shut their machine off completely much more often than Windows and Mac users do, which would explain why boot times are so important to them.

Linux users turning off their machines all the time… Anybody else seeing the irony in that?

This entry was posted on November 1, 2008, 10:33 pm and is filed under General. You can follow any responses to this entry through RSS 2.0.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.

i use linux at home, not because i want to, but because xp stopped recognizing my hard drive. while i can get the job done, i still think it smells. i have put so much time into it just to get simple things to work: screen resolution, wireless mouse (replaced already), sound …. frankly, linux is seriously over-hyped.
i turn my machine off every night to conserve power. off simply because hibernate and standby were things i never got to work.

hi cedric,
if I remember you right, you’ve been saying that Windows is a power user’s dream. It really is(meaning, a Desktop power user’s dream). I dual boot to Ubuntu on my home laptop! and I can feel crippled a few times when I want the power of Task Manager or sysinternals Process Explorer or Process Monitor.
WIN +R : running a program makes life a lot more easier.
Also Ubuntu and other distro have stopped making DVD distros forcing you to get a lot of the packages after you download and install.
For server tasks, Linux is king with all the console mode programs BUT even the server version(the ones with GUI) could do with a decent Task Manager or Process Explorer.
I see that more and more software engineers are taking to Linux. This will make them adopt linux as a dual boot BUT that probably won’t make it the primary desktop. The GUI looks kinda rough. Where is the cleartype applet that makes my windows desktop so much better ?

Unless I’m mistaken, you’ve got the wrong end of the stick. It’s saying that Linux will be shipped on more desktops (hyperbole, sure) because it’s included in the computer itself, not because they’re going to be running it as the primary OS. It’s like the ROM BASIC from the IBM XT days, only much more advanced.

Maybe what he’s really saying is that 2009 will be the year of the laptop. Windows users will all be buying laptops. Linux users know enough not to try to run Linux on a laptop, so they’ll still be buying desktops. Hence, Linux >> Windows on desktops.

cedric,
I am sure kicking into linux feels good ie “Ironically, Linux laptops are still struggling with the concept of hibernation, so it’s quite possible that Linux users shut their machine off completely much more often than Windows and Mac users do, which would explain why boot times are so important to them. ”
but you missed the point *entirely* (please read the times article again or go to say splashtop.com).
“Splashtop is preinstalled on the hard drive or in the on-board Flash memory of new PCs and motherboards by their manufacturers”
the splashtop technology (based on linux) has nothing to do with your primary OS (which still can be windows).

I don’t believe that saying Linux is over-hyped is 100% in the context. The desktop distributions are the only ones that are over-hyped (see Ubuntu series). Let’s not forget what Linux stands for on the server-side.
In my opinion, Linux will never truly make it on the desktop. Or at least not in it’s current condition (and again, I am talking here about Ubuntu – which is a lot better than most desktop distros). I use Linux for some time now, but, indeed, I used to spend a lot of time to figure out simple issues like resolution, wireless, etc.
But I am f**kin’ developer so I know what I am doing 80% of the time on a Linux box. You can’t get an accountant or a sales guy to compile his audio player to listen to some music – that’s a no-go. Linux won’t make it in the end-user market without strong support for usability. These guys are spending lots of time on Beryl and other crappy eye-candy-enhancing-bullshit and (almost) nobody cares about the god damn user.

“These guys are spending lots of time on Beryl and other crappy eye-candy-enhancing-bullshit and (almost) nobody cares about the god damn user.”
And that is intentional. The Linux crowd is so arrogant with little self esteem that they WANT you to praise them for their understanding of technical stuff. They therefore make it hard. And therefore make themselves look smart. It feeds their ego.
But it’s not just Linux. It’s Perl. It’s regex. It’s anything that makes technology hard to use.
They perpetuate this problem, and Windows (as flawed as it is), make billions.
If you made Linux truly user friendly, they’d make another OS that was hard to use and repeat the cycle.
They want it this way.
Notice, however, as an anecdote, that for all the complexity of Google’s search algorithms, their UI is notoriously…simple.
They’re repeating Gates’ success formula: complex (if need be) on the inside…easy to use on the outside.

“These guys are spending lots of time on Beryl and other crappy eye-candy-enhancing-bullshit and (almost) nobody cares about the god damn user.”
And that is intentional. The Linux crowd is so arrogant with little self esteem that they WANT you to praise them for their understanding of technical stuff. They therefore make it hard. And therefore make themselves look smart. It feeds their ego.
But it’s not just Linux. It’s Perl. It’s regex. It’s anything that makes technology hard to use.
They perpetuate this problem, and Windows (as flawed as it is), make billions.
If you made Linux truly user friendly, they’d make another OS that was hard to use and repeat the cycle.
They want it this way.
Notice, however, as an anecdote, that for all the complexity of Google’s search algorithms, their UI is notoriously…simple.
They’re repeating Gates’ success formula: complex (if need be) on the inside…easy to use on the outside.

Linux on the desktop, that probably makes no sense for Joe the Plumber. He’s been educated with Windows so he’s used to that and anyway he needs simple things so Windows is enough for him.
On my side I use Linux because I have been using UNIX for 20 years. And also because it looks like I can’t find my way in Windows GUIs. XP is a nice and stable gaming OS for me (though my PS3 is better at that).
What I find ironic is that some ex-UNIX gurus and lovers switched to Windows and started to laugh at Linux. Everyone has the right to dislike the Linux hacker community behavior (I do). Does that dismiss Linux? No, and I tend to think that those who have a problem with that arrogant community should cure something else
I think that Linux and Apple exclusive lovers are dumb, but the same stands for MS lovers and gurus (no, I won’t dig out some famous Gates quotes
Oh and my Linux laptop has no issue with hibernation, while I could never make it work for my Windows desktop.

Just as a partial counter to your argument, the sole reason I could justify a mac laptop to myself is because I’ve never seen a PC able to reliably suspend and restore more than a trivial number of times, and generally after the first suspend/restore, stability is degraded until a reboot.
If a Linux machine could boot and shut down in a few seconds, I’d seriously (re)consider it (I haven’t liked linux’s suspend/restore any more than Windows…)
Apple is the only company that got suspend/resume right, and they did it through limiting hardware… I’m sure if Microsoft only had a single hardware target they’d be at least as good as the Mac at this.
Oh, also a neat trick–the mac suspends and hibernates at the same time every time you close the lid. You never notice the hibernate and there is no option for it, but if you yank the battery, it’ll still resume properly on the next boot–pretty cool trick.

I use Kubuntu on my laptop, as my primary OS. Works great for me, but then again, I’m a software engineer.
But I also built a little computer for $200 in parts, and it runs Kubuntu also. This computer lives in the kitchen, and is used by the family for web browsing, email, and flash games. Works great. Free OS. If it had to run Vista, it would need another $500 in parts.
So, as Linux matures, I think it will capture more and more of the market share. It’s infinitely less expensive than Windows, for one thing.
And what of this rumor I heard, that Windows 7 will charge $29 per month to license you a copy of their OS? If they do that, there’s going to be a mass migration to free operating systems, and Linux is on the top of that heap.

I’ve read articles stating that every year since 1996 was going to be the “year of Linux”. It’s here now, and has been for at least ten years. The problem for Linux is to get more market share, and that’s hard to do when Linux is fragmented among so many different flavors.